The science of animal feeling

Irtlltll{tlilIll
By Dr. Jake Veasey, Director of Animal
Care, Conservation and Research at
the Calgary Zoo
nimal wefare is, il not the biggest, than certalny one ot
the blggest cha lenges fac ng zoos-something that is of
fundarrental importance to accredited zoos and aqual
ums. Meeting the highest standards for anlmal care is at
the heart of Canada's Accredited Zoos and Aquariums
But how are standards for animal wefare set? And
what exact y do we mean when we ta k about an antma 's
welfare?

s it

dltion or

rs

simply a function of an anima 's physica con


there more than that?

And how do we ensure accredited zoos and aquariums are doing the very best they can for the arrlmaLs
under their care? Us ng

the atest science around zoo

atri-

ma we fare, and adaptlng programs and facl ities accordlng y, is cru-

.d

cial; unfortunate y, the science isn't a ways straightlorward.

sa

of

Arrrnra Care, Conservation and

ln both animal wel
fare research and the management of zoo animal welfare for over
two decades. llere, he provides an insight into what anima wefare

Dr. lake Veasey, Director

Research at the Calgary Zoo, has been lnvo ved

means to him as a sclentist and practltloner in this fle d, and exp ores
how modern zoos and aquar ums should reconsider their prioritles to
distinguish the activities that rrake people fee good from those that

1;

make anrma s fee good.

Reconsidering priorities in modern zoos and

aquariums
As a behavioura eco ogist and anima weLfare sclentist by tra ning

who has worked in the wild and in zoos n Europe and North America
for over two decades, I seem to have deve oped a surpr sing y unique
perspective on zoo anima we fare. Sonre argue that any animal iving
in captiv ty, by defau t, has poor we fare, but my research and exper

ence eads me to disagree.
Having investigated this premise whlle worklng wlth wlld and captive giraffes in the mid-1990s in the United Kingdom and in Zimba'
bwe, it became c ear to me that captivity does not necessar y compromise animal we fare. Rather, some of the parameters that can be

rottlinuul ott ltttg' l2

/
Workinq
on'-'

The Science of
Animal Feeling

t)r..lufu linu1. l)irrlor


(nlln\

Ztn.

ttf

.\ttitttal (ttr( (rtttsttt,rtliott tttrl lltsran lt tl lltt

|J

tl ilrd titt tl I ll lullt9 tll I

I

Par Jake Veasey, Ph.D., directeur des
soins aux animaux, de la conservation et
de la recherche au zoo de Calgary
e blen-etre des an maux est 'un des princlpaux

def s,

sinon le p us grand, b re ever dans un zoo une responsabilite d'une importance capita e confiee aux zoos et a!x
aquarirms accredites. Respecter les normes les p us e1e

vees en rnatiere de bien dtre des animaux est au cceur du

joue par les Aquariums et zoos accred tes du Canada.
Mais de quelle faqorr ces normes de bien-etre des
anlmaux sont-e es etablies? Et que signifie exactement
le concept de bien-6tre animal? Est-ce qu'i s'agit simplement d'assurer eur bonne condition physique, ou y a-t i
d'autres aspects a prendre en consideration?
ro e

De plus, comment fait-on pour s'assurer

que es zoos

et

es aquariums accredites du Canada font le maximum pour 1e
bien-etre des animaux qui sont sous eur garde? Pour ce faire,

est crucia de se servir des donnees scient fiques es plus recentes
i

concernant le blen otre des animaux de zoos et d'adapter les programrnes et lnstallations en consequence; ma beureusement, a
science n'est pas toujours aussi clarre et simple qu'on e voudrait.
M. Jake Veasey, Ph.D., directeur des soins aux anlmaux, de a
conservation et de la recherche au zoo de Ca gary, participe a a
recherche sur e bien-etre animal et a a gestion des soins aux an maux de zoos depuis p us d'une vingta ne d'annees. Son rd e est
de fournir la me lJeure comprehens on possib e de ce que slgnifie

e bien 6tre des animaux de son point de vue de

sc

entifrque et

de praticien du domarne a egalement pour tache d'explorer des
methodes permettant aux zoos et aux aquariums modernes de reeva uer eurs priorites de fagon a faire a distinctlon entre es actlvites
qui rassurent les gens et cel es qui apportent p us de bien €tre aux
a n


ima ux.

R66valuer les priorit6s dans les zoos et les aquariums

modernes
< Comme j'ai une formation d'eco ogiste du comportement
animal et de specia iste du bien-6tre des animaux, et j'ai travaille
en mi reu sauvage et dans des zoos en Europe et en Amerique du
Nord pendant plus de deux decennles, je pense que 1'ai developpe
tuitt

,l
,/

ti

I,:
---


!t
'/

/-

!

i lt lng' l1

,l

..r'

des animaux
fultt li,a.v't, Plt.l)., diretltur rlrr.rortrr rtrtr uninruu.r, (lr l(t ())t\t t1\tlit)Jt rl
dr ln rarhertltr uu

tn rlt (ttlpu\.

:


l'art de decoder
leur humeur

II

IIJtililfiiilil
rcntinued from pagc

l0

associated with captivity do, but not inevita-

bly so, and most can be eliminated through
facility design or management based around

g=
E

n

n
#
-t

s
s
tr

a

t

a sound understanding of animal wefare
and species. This, and my experience working in zoos, has led me to be optlmistic about
zoo animal welfare prospects.
I

believe the welfare of animals in captivity

not inevitably impoverished in comparison

to those in the wild. Animals in the wild typically endure predation, disease, parasitisrn
and starvation at levels far higher than those
seen in captivity, Removing these stressors
and providing animals in captivity with the
is

unlikely to be chronic episodes in the wild,
while an individual anima that is not welladapted to captivity is likely to present a

chronic welfare challenge.
But let's start at the beginning. What is
animal welfare, exactly? Although complex

to

measure, animal welfare is relatively sim-

ply defined. Animal welfare relates specifically to an animal's psychological state-ln
other words, what it feels. In simple terms,
good welfare might be considered an animal
experiencing positive emotional states and

they make it extremely difficult to definitively
prove the status of an animal's welfarewhether good or bad. This absence of proof
has, I feel, led zoos to increasingly focus on
the most measurable, but not necessarily the
most productive, areas in which to enhance
welfare.

So, zoos and aquariums must not be
complacent about zoo animal welfare lust
because we feel we provide extensive veterlnary care, balanced diets and sheiter from

negl igible suffering. Conversely, poor welfare

the elements. We need to consider welfare
as part of a much more holistic framework.

entails prolonged or severe mental suffering,
whether due to physical or psychological

But it's equally important to understand not
only what welfare is, but what lt is not.

opportunlty to express natural behaviours
and exerclse choice, makes it quite possible

chal lenges.

that we may even be able to improve the
welfare for many animals, when compared

guage with animals, they can't tell us directly

Perhaps one of the biggest areas of confusion, particularly among critics of zoos and
aquariums, is the assumption that ethics and

how they feel. As a result, we are forced to
make inferences based on indirect indicators of what we think they are feeling. This

the feelings of animals, while ethics relate
to human feelings-those of individuals

to their wild relatives.
However, it would be a mistake to view
gains in health care, food security or the

removal of predators associated with cap-

tivity as adequate compensation for understimulation or a lack of behavioural opportunlties. lllness, predation or starvation are

Because we don't share a common lan-

where the science gets challenging; none
of those indicators are perfect and all are

is

subject to interpretive challenges. There isn't
time to discuss these challenges in any detail

but it's important to know they exist because

welfare are synonymous. Welfare relates to

and societies-about what is morally right
and wrong. Moreover, what is right for animal welfare does not necessarily match the
prevaili ng ethical perspectives of individuals,

societies and, consequently, zoos. Animal

testing and intensive livestock productlon,

for example, continue to receive broad
acceptance, while it is generally acknowledqed they compromise animal welfare.
Ethical frameworks are not universal but
animal welfare is. One example that clearly
illustrates this variance is in animal welfare
legislation; a manifestatlon of a society's ethical priorities. Farrowing crates were banned

in the United Kingdom in 1999 in light of
research rhat implicated them in cornpromised pregnant and nursing pig welfare.
However, in spite of this research, their use
remains widespread within the United States
and pigs there wi I suffer just as much as pigs

did historically in the United Kingdom. This
difference in legal position with respect to

A sound understanding

the same data has to represent a difference

between the

two nations' ethical priori-

ties. The fact that this position is

now under
review in the United States, and that some
states have banned the use of farrowing

that ethical perspec-

of anirnal welfare should. be tfu foundation
li,ke these

watan lowland gorillas.

fm

the care we proaidz aII

pH0T0 cBEon B|LL ouAytE: pH0T0 pF0Vr0E0 Bvrue

mlolnv

animak,

zoo.

/

approfondi.e du bim Ate animal danrait Ate bfond,ment dcs soins que l'on d,onne aux tout
ces

gorille du plaines occidcntalzs.

LE

pH0r0 pM B|LL ouAyLE:

LE PH0T0 F0uFNrEs PAR

Une cornprdhension

la animaux,

tE 200 0€ 0ALGARY

populations of animals, and not just our own

the relationship between health and welfare.

or no manipulation by the animal. The consequentia negative impacts of these "complete" diets is ikely to be broad and may
impinge on areas as diverse as diminished

Health is a component of welfare but is not

social cohesion and,

synonymous wlth it. The health of an animal

socia stress, reduced physical condition,

should be the foundation for the care we
provide animals. Zoos may choose to deviate from a path of anima welfare to address

can affect its welfare-and its welfare can

increased stereotypic behaviours and gen-

firmly held ethlcal perspectives, such

affect its health-but they are not the same.
Health refers to the physical, rather than the
psychological, wellbeing of an anlmal. lf a
disease causes pain or reduces the ability of
an animal to interact with other animals, or
its surrounding, the disease may reduce its
welfare. However, a disease that does not

eral understimulation.

moves related to euthanasia, but we need to

crates, also illustrates
tives change over time.

Another area that needs clarification

is

impact behaviour, or create discomfort, may
not necessarily impact an animal's welfare at
that time.
Delivering health care can be both stressful and risky for zoo animals. To maximize zoo
animal welfare, the welfare costs and

risks

of

with

it,

chronic elevated

Are the potential costs of providing such

an unnatural diet justified by the potential
benefits? Have the potential benefits even
been determined, let alone proven? lf not,
why do we do it? | believe the answer

is

that,

to understand
animal welfare from a holistic perspective
and have been seduced by the tanqibles
of protein content and iron leveis at the
expense of the far less tangible indicators of
as an industry, we have failed

animal welfare.
In

the same way that health and welfare

providing health care must be balanced with
the galns for the animals. n other words, to
maximize welfare, we need to optimlze, not

are not equivalent, death must a so be clearly

maximize, health care.

welfare-good or bad-is a function of

Nutrition ls intimately linked to health,
so let's consider one example of how an
unqualified focus on health can inadvertently compromise welfare. Wild lions typically thrive if they are able to feed on the
carcasses of wild animals on a biweekly or
triweekly basis, as they have evolved to do

differentiated from welfare. In essence, death
is the cessation of brain activity, whereas
brain activity. The two are mutuaily exclusive

but this doesn't mean death and welfare are
unconnected. How animals die, what factors
cause thelr deaths, and the potential impacts

sensibilities.
A sound understanding of animal welfare

as

be honest about these choices.
We recently reviewed the CAZA standards

for elephants and I was pleased to see there
was broad consensus to set those standards
around the needs of the animals, based on
the latest knowledge, rather than to set them
around the status quo and wait until we are
forced to change due to external pressure.
What this means, in the short-term, is that
CAZA facilities have work to do for elephants,
but in the long-term, we move ever closer to
securing the wellbeing of the animals in our
care long into the future. We also provide a
foundation to start establishinq ourselves as
genuine animal welfare organizations.
We already know enough about the
behavioural ecology of most species to dramatically enhance their wellbeing, so why
wait? Just as our predecessors took the brave
and difficult step of moving away from steel

on surviving animals, could a1l be relevant to
a welfare discussion. However, understand-

and concrete enclosures to vegetated habi-

ing the true relationship between

and their descendants,

tats, we owe it to the animals under our care,

millennia. However, many zoos feed

and welfare should be central to dlscus-

to be open to a new
paradigm-one which prioritizes the psy-

smaller portions of processed, "nutritionally
complete" meals daily, which require little

sions about euthanasia in zoos if we are to
truly provlde for the needs of individuals and

chological needs of animals over the needs
of people. r;f

so

for

death

.jii :.:::::r.lr , :.':;l

commz

[Mtilgnil
\uil( d( ln l(g( I I
une perspective etonnamment unique de
ce qu'est le bien-€tre des animaux de zoos.
Certains diront que le bien 6tre d'un anlma
en captivite est, par definition, de pietre

,t

qualite, mais mes recherches et de 'exp.;rience m'amene d 6tre en desaccord.
Pour avoir etudie cette hypothese alors
que le travalllais avec des girafes en liberte

,l990

et en captivite au mi ieu des annees
au Royaume Uni et au Zimbabwe, ll m'est
apparu clarrement que a captivite ne

compromet pas

necessa

renlent e

bien

etre animal. Au contralre, certains des para
metres qur peuvent 6tre assocles ) la capti
vite faire, mais pas forcement si, et a plupart
peuvent etre elimines au niveau de l'ameragenenL Qe-ri9r basee r*'JrF conprehension solide de protect on des animaux
et des especes, ou de la gestion des installot or>. C€ po,rr. ajolLe a r.'lor e,perierce
de travail dans des zoos, me rend optimiste
quant aux perspectlves de bien 6tre des
anrmarx dans es zoos.

le crois fermement que 1e bien-etre des
(oOt r tp ^e risquent d'€tre
considdrables et peuvent se traduire par
des consdquences aussi diverses qu'une
diminution de la cohesion sociale et, par le

fait m6me, l'augmentation du stress social
chronique, une moins bonne condition
physique, la multiplication de comportements st6reotyp6s et une sous-stimulation
g6n6rale.

l'6tablissement de

tifiques les plus rdcentes, plutOt que d'opter
pour le statu quo et d'attendre jusqu') ce
qu'on soit force de changer ) cause de pres-

maxirniser, les soins de sante qui leur sont prodigues,
le bien-6tre-ou le mal-dtre-est

)

ces normes en fonction des besoins des
animaux, ) panir des connaissances scien-

le bien-etre des anirnaux, on doit optirniser, et non

la

les

normes de I'AZAC relativement aux el6phants, et c'est avec plaisir que j'ai not6 un

de sante olleds, d'une part, et les b,enefices pour les

La nutrition est 6troitement li6e d

nos

choix.

Les deux sont

et les impacts potentiels sur les animaux
survivants sont tous des elements pertinents dans une discussion sur le bien-Atre
animal. Cependant,
comprdhension
de la v6ritable relation entre Ia mort et le

la

bien-dtre devrait etre un enjeu central dans
ces discussions sur l'euthanasie dans les
zoos si nous voulons vraiment r6pondre
aux besoins individuels des animaux et des
populations anlmales, et pas seulement
calmer nos propres sensibilitds.

Une comp16hension approfondie

sions ext6rieures. Ce qu'il faut en conclure,
e court terme, c'est que les etablissements
membres de I'AZAC ont beaucoup d faire
pour les 616phants, mais ) long terme, nous

devons assurer un plus grand bien-€tre
des animaux dont nous sommes responsables et ce, pour de nombreuses ann6es
) venir. Nous devons 6galement jeter les
bases d'une nouvelle approche o! nous
6tablirons notre rdle comme celui de v6ritables organisations charg6es du bien-€tre
des animaux.

Nous en savons dej) suffisamment sur
l'6cologie comportementale des la plupart

des espdces pour am6liorer considdrablement leur bien-etre, alors pourquoi attendre? Tout comme nos prddecesseurs ont
pris la declsion courageuse de changer les

du

enclos d'acier et de bdton pour des habitats

bien-Atre animal devrait 6tre le fondement

veg6talises, nous devons bien aux animaux
qui nous sont confl6s et ) leurs descendants
d'ouvrir la porte i un nouveau paradigmequi priorise les besoins psychologiques des

des soins que l'on donne aux animaux. Les

zoos peuvent d6cider de s'dcarter d'une
approche de bien-dtre animal pour r6pondre d des consid6rations ethiques fermes,

animaux avant les attentes du public.

r;f